# "Bis" in treaty articles **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 6, 2005, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364 "2005-12-06T15:57:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/1 "2005-12-06T15:57:16Z")
What is the meaning of _bis_ as used to designate divisions of an international treaty, as in “Article 6_bis_ of the Paris Convention”? ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/2 "2005-12-06T16:34:39Z")
Article 6, Section b, subsection i, paragraph s (The i is a roman numeral). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/3 "2005-12-06T16:44:23Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > Article 6, Section b, subsection i, paragraph s (The i is a roman numeral). Are you joking? Because I don’t think so. I’ve seen it too often for it to mean something like this. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/4 "2005-12-06T17:01:11Z")
I think RealityChuck was in a mischevious mood. “Bis” tends to get tacked on (especially by the French) when you have the next version of something. [This site](http://www.totse.com/en/technology/telecommunications/vee-dot.html) gives a reasonable sense of the meaning: > [@](#): > > Confused by all the terms? V.22, V.22bis, V.32, V.42, V.42bis and MNP? These are all technical names given to communications standards as recommended by the CCITT (another achronym!). V.22bis, pronounced, “VEE-DOT TWENTY-TWO BISS” is the technical name for what we know as a 2400 baud dial-up modem. V.22 was the official designation for the 1200 baud modems and the “bis” suffix (bis meaning “second”) was added when the 2400 baud standard was settled upon. ---
**Author:** ![aktep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f0a364/32.png) [@aktep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aktep)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/5 "2005-12-06T17:28:22Z")
[http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/paris/trtdocs\_wo020.html](http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/paris/trtdocs_wo020.html) bis has something to do with “2nd”. See above link and use of ter, quater, quinquies, sexies and septies ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/6 "2005-12-06T17:31:53Z")
While this might be a use of the term, I don’t think it really explains the use in treaties, because that would mean that Article 6_bis_ replaces Article 6. I don’t think that’s what happens. However, your explanation that it means “second” does help. And now I’ve found the text of the Paris Convention and I see it has lots of these things: Article 5 Article 5bis Article 5ter Article 5quater Article 5quinquies Article 6 Article 6bis Article 6ter Article 6quater Article 6quinquies Article 6sexies Article 6septies Article 7 Article 7bis Article 8 So it looks like a way of sticking in more subdivisions without changing the numbering system. In the U.S., we might do something like 6, 6A, 6B, 6D, 6E, 6F, 6G, instead. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2005, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/7 "2005-12-06T20:30:39Z")
And incidentally, in French house addresses, you’ll often see something like 32 _bis_, which would be the equivalent of our 32B, or sometimes 32 1/2. ---
**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2005, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bis-in-treaty-articles/334364/8 "2005-12-07T19:42:01Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > So it looks like a way of sticking in more subdivisions without changing the numbering system. In the U.S., we might do something like 6, 6A, 6B, 6D, 6E, 6F, 6G, instead. I guess that hits the nail. The bis/ter/etc. articles are amendments added later on (and placed next to an existing article because their content is related to the content of that existing article).